Hargett v. .

Superior Court of North Carolina

Hargett v. .

3 N.C. 76

Superior Court of North Carolina·Decided July 5, 1799·Published

Opinion

The contents of a record lost or destroyed cannot be proven otherwise than by a copy. It is better to suffer a private mischief than a public inconvenience, especially one of such magnitude as the introducing of parol testimony to supply a record.

Quere de hoc by Reporter.

NOTE. — See Stuart v. Fitzgerald, 6 N.C. 255; S. c., 4 N.C. 17,234; Spencer v. Cohoon, 18 N.C. 27.

Overruled: Mobley v. Watts, 98 N.C. 288.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The contents of a record lost or destroyed cannot be proven otherwise than by a copy. It is better to suffer a private mischief than a public inconvenience, especially one of such magnitude as the introducing of parol testimony to supply a record.

Quere de hoc by Reporter.

NOTE. — See Stuart v. Fitzgerald, 6 N.C. 255; S. c., 4 N.C. 17,234; Spencer v. Cohoon, 18 N.C. 27.

Overruled: Mobley v. Watts, 98 N.C. 288.

Hargett v. ., 3 N.C. 76 (N.C. Ct. App. 1799).

Pincite

3 N.C. 76 (Hargett v. .) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related